Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Brekat

'Everything but Marriage' Law

Recommended Posts

http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid84697.asp

Nearly 300 Washingtonians joined Gov. Chris Gregoire as she signed a bill Monday that adds more than 400 additional rights and benefits to those previously granted under the state's domestic-partnership law. The changes, for which lawmakers have dubbed the DP registry "everything but marriage," expands on the initial law from 2007.

"Many brave families have come forward to share their lives, their struggles, and their moments of joy -- hardworking men and women who are in committed relationships, raising children, attending their places of worship, and volunteering in their communities," Gregoire said in a statement. "After meeting these families, people have come to know that lesbian and gay families are no different than their own. And what has naturally followed is the unsettling notion that despite the sameness of straight couples and gay and lesbian couples, there are, in fact, legal barriers that prevent the same treatment."

Nearly 5,400 couples have registered in the past two years, according to the secretary of state's office.

The additions that Gregoire approved yesterday include more provisions for public sector workers. Firefighters, police officers, and paramedics were among the hundreds that attended the signing ceremony. Birth certificates for children born to a registered same-sex couple will automatically include the names of both parents, not solely that of the biological parent. Registered partners can also use sick leave to care for each other, and they will also be entitled to unpaid wages and benefits when a partner is injured or dies.

However, as Josh Friedes, advocacy director for Equal Rights Washington, said on Tuesday, "we're at the end of the beginning." LGBT residents are still fighting for full-on marriage equality, and are hoping to do so after states like Vermont and New Hampshire recently shirked their civil unions for marriage equality."

Meanwhile, the drive to overturn the bipartisan legislature's recent success is already under way. Opponents have until July 25 to gather 120,577 signatures for a November ballot initiative that would overturn the domestic-partnership registry. The wording on Referendum 71 would be different from California's Proposition 8 -- instead of voting "yes" against domestic-partnership rights, a "yes" vote in Washington would be in favor of "everything but marriage" domestic partnerships, which Friedes said could lessen confusion for voters at the ballot box. Equal Rights Washington is spearheading a "Decline to Sign" campaign to ask friends, families, and allies not to sign the petition.[/b]

Please don't turn this into a debate, but I do want to see people's opinions on this. I think that this is a way to give homosexual couples the benefits that they would want from a marriage, without actually being "married". (Which is what everyone seems to have a problem with.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So homosexual partners get all these legal benefits due to their relationship... but it's "everything but marriage". So what is it exactly they're not getting? I'm confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More evidence that essentially no one understands the idea of marriage in the first place; at least, not the politicians and those who support these particular policies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically, what this has done is it gives the partners all the benefits. Like, if one is a fireman and dies, the other partner gets the life insurance or whatever. Basically they get all the benefits of married couples without actually being married.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Basically, what this has done is it gives the partners all the benefits. Like, if one is a fireman and dies, the other partner gets the life insurance or whatever. Basically they get all the benefits of married couples without actually being married.[/b]

Yes, but what is it that they have to miss out on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have got to be kidding about this the world is so twisted today the goverment and politicians brother its so sad to see what homosexuals are doing and its total sin the bible says so but man has twisted so much to making it us to be the bad guys and them right its terrible. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like what Bryce was saying. They don't understand what marriage is. What we have in our society is a legal recognition of a religious pratice. Nothing more and nothing less. I like the idea of this law, but I have yet to see why they can not have a legal marriage and not a religious one. Call me naive, but they're two very different things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, but what is it that they have to miss out on?[/b]

Basically just marriage. That's why it's everything BUT marriage.

They don't get to be husband and husband or wife and wife. Woo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, but what is it that they have to miss out on?[/b]

the only thing they miss out is the word marriage

for some reason people believe that every marriage will be tainted if gay people can do it aswell. Which I find illogical, seeing as 2 people who get drunk and get hitched by some elvis impersonator are allowed to use the term marriage and thats immoral aswell so surely the word is kinda tainted already.

I say good for them to get 99% of their legal rights but in mky eyes it will still only be a legal and social marriage I do not consider it a sacramental one approved by god and I will not change my stance on that fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I dont think gays should be married legal or anything cause it making it alright which it isnt marriage isnt gonna make it right or get them to heaven its sin end of story so many people are afraid of being bold and speaking out cause there are so many homosexuals and because it might offend them pish posh we have just as much right as they do.

I'm not saying God doesnt love these people but its immoral and against what God intended marriage to be.

Its like look in the bible its right in front of you in black and white.

But there is another thing God gave us freedom of choice its up to us what we do with that choice we can do wrong or right

God left it for us to make up our own minds He will not force you to do anything you dont want to just remember with every wrong choice there is a consequence.

GOD IS THE SAME YESTERDAY TODAY AND FOREVER!

Romans 8:1,

There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus,who do not walk according to the Spirit.

GOD IS THE SAME YESTERDAY TODAY AND FOREVER!

Romans 6:23,

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

GOD IS THE SAME YESTERDAY TODAY AND FOREVER!

Leviticus 18:22,

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.

GOD IS THE SAME YESTERDAY TODAY AND FOREVER!

Leviticus 20:13,

If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.

GOD IS THE SAME YESTERDAY TODAY AND FOREVER!

Hebrews 13:8.,

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

GOD IS THE SAME YESTERDAY TODAY AND FOREVER!

Leviticus 18:26,

You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations, either any of your own nation or any stranger who dwells among you

GOD IS THE SAME YESTERDAY TODAY AND FOREVER!

Leviticus 19:20,

Whoever lies carnally with a woman who is betrothed to a man as a concubine, and who has not at all been redeemed nor given her freedom, for this there shall be scourging; but they shall not be put to death, because she was not free.

GOD IS THE SAME YESTERDAY TODAY AND FOREVER!

So you see its right there you can believe it you can recieve it its all up to you so who will you choose which path the way of eternal life or death?

Well God Bless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak for anybody else, but I knew that if I were to fall in love with another woman and we wanted to have a life together, then I would want to get married in the "traditional" sense, before God. Just because a person is gay doesn't mean they can't be a Christian.

Separate but equal, really worked well for the black population.[/b]

Gay is now the new black; Hispanic is the new gay (heard that in The Advocate).

It just makes me shake my head when I look at people who are so against gay marriage saying the same things that people who protested the Civil Rights Movement and interracial marriage said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen did u read it,I'm against it cause look it says so in the bible its sin and u cant be living in sin and expect God to agree with it nu uh its wrong end or story!

And weither u have a wedding and think because u do it under the eye of God boy your wrong its wrong weither u get married or not.

You cant say your a christian and be living in complete sin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't speak for anybody else, but I knew that if I were to fall in love with another woman and we wanted to have a life together, then I would want to get married in the "traditional" sense, before God. Just because a person is gay doesn't mean they can't be a Christian.[/b]

It cannot be denied, for it a historical fact, that there is essentially no substantial theological argument for gay sacramental marriage in Christianity; never has been (in the last 2,000 years), never will be.

Many people want many things in the eyes of God. Most people want to be saved in the eyes of God, but we cannot pretend that everyone who wants to be saved is willing to be saved in the end. God does not, nor could even, bend for humans. He does it His way, and that's the only way it's going to get done.

It just makes me shake my head when I look at people who are so against gay marriage saying the same things that people who protested the Civil Rights Movement and interracial marriage said.[/b]

Out of curiosity, what are those things?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Listen did u read it,I'm against it cause look it says so in the bible its sin and u cant be living in sin and expect God to agree with it nu uh its wrong end or story!

And weither u have a wedding and think because u do it under the eye of God boy your wrong its wrong weither u get married or not.

You cant say your a christian and be living in complete sin.[/b]

joselyn aaron, try to keep in mind that not everyone in the entire world is Christian.

So the biblical verses you posted earlier do not mean anything to me at all.

Gay marriage will have NO effect on a Christian marriage. We might as well ban Atheists from getting married, along with Agnostics and Deists and etc. <_<

Not everyone has religious marriages!

So when you say this

I'm not saying God doesnt love these people but its immoral and against what God intended marriage to be.[/b]

I can just as easily say: So what? I'm not a Christian, I don't believe in your god, and I don't find it immoral. And I believe marriage to be a man-made institution, not a Christian only or religious only institution.

You're biblical version of Marriage is just that. It only applies to Christians. And Gay Marriage has no effect on Christian Marriage (unless a church is forced to prefer a gay marriage ceremony, in which case it would affect it and I'm against that. Unless the specific church supports it. But not everyone who gets married, has a Christian ceremony.)

Christians do not own the word "Marriage" thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Listen did u read it,I'm against it cause look it says so in the bible its sin and u cant be living in sin and expect God to agree with it nu uh its wrong end or story!

And weither u have a wedding and think because u do it under the eye of God boy your wrong its wrong weither u get married or not.

You cant say your a christian and be living in complete sin.[/b]

This is NOT a debate. Your opinion really isn't adding anything to this discussion, all you're doing is upsetting people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is NOT a debate. Your opinion really isn't adding anything to this discussion, all you're doing is upsetting people.[/b]

My mistake as well, I shouldn't have even bothered replying to her. :shutup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Basically just marriage. That's why it's everything BUT marriage.

They don't get to be husband and husband or wife and wife. Woo.[/b]

That's not an answer though. I still want to know what they don't get (though I suspect it's nothing). What, in practical terms, do they not benefit from that heterosexual couples do?

So they get the legal benefits, they are obviously not disallowed from setting up their own ceremony... what else is missing? The willingness of people who disagree with their sexual orientation to call them married?

If all this comes down to is just a definition then I'm astonished. It's no good saying "They just don't get 'marriage'" if marriage is never defined. To consider something a marriage, you have to first define what a 'marriage' is. A legal marriage is a contract between two people in which they get some legal benefits. A sentimental ceremony is optional, but usually done as well. That's all that homosexuals have been fighting for all along; a legal marriage -to get what's fair. Now some people are saying "Well, we'll grant you the legal benefits, since that's fair, and you may have a ceremony if you wish [no one can disallow a ceremony] but we're just not going to call you married". That's awful, sneaky, and quite disrespectful, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Progress.

Next step: No legal marriage! Then the state will be where it should be... not involved in a religious tradition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Progress.

Next step: No legal marriage! Then the state will be where it should be... not involved in a religious tradition.[/b]

I agree. Civil Unions for all, and if they want to go to a church or temple or any other religions place to have it called Marriage, I'm fine by that.

Though Atheists and Agnostics should still be able to call it Marriage. Marriage is not a religious institution after all, only if the couples want it to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seperate but equal, really worked well for the black population.[/b]

This is a terrible argument.

You can not force a pastor to marry a homosexual couple, period. The government can not impede on a religious institution.

There are legal court issued marriages (outside of the church) that are regulated by democratic process and legislation. Then there are civil unions. Civil unions are the compromise, for they recognize the sanctity of marriage, yet provide all the legal rights one should be entitled to.

Lastly it is impossible, repeat impossible, for a homosexual couple to marry. Signing a document and agreeing to a contract is NOT a marriage. Marriage is done by God on a spiritual level. It is the combining of two into one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are legal court issued marriages (outside of the church) that are regulated by democratic process and legislation. Then there are civil unions. Civil unions are the compromise, for they recognize the sanctity of marriage, yet provide all the legal rights one should be entitled to.[/b]
Signing a document and agreeing to a contract is NOT a marriage. Marriage is done by God on a spiritual level. It is the combining of two into one.[/b]

Exactly, seperate but equal. You contradicted yourself, if civil marrige is not a marrige then your religious belief have no impact on you whether or not homosexuals can get a civil marriage. The same goes for why legislature can have no impact on whether or not a gay person is allowed to get a religious marriage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a terrible argument.

You can not force a pastor to marry a homosexual couple, period. The government can not impede on a religious institution.

There are legal court issued marriages (outside of the church) that are regulated by democratic process and legislation. Then there are civil unions. Civil unions are the compromise, for they recognize the sanctity of marriage, yet provide all the legal rights one should be entitled to.

Lastly it is impossible, repeat impossible, for a homosexual couple to marry. Signing a document and agreeing to a contract is NOT a marriage. Marriage is done by God on a spiritual level. It is the combining of two into one.[/b]

Marriage is NOT a religious institution, nor do Christians own it. What about the Buddhists, Pagans, Druids, etc who get married? Atheists and Agnostics, Deists and Pantheists? How about everyone else, who isn't a Christian?

Should we ban them from getting married? After all, you said Marriage is done by God, so what about all the unbelievers? Are they really not married? <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×